Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

15. Later, the Division Bench of the Tribunal at Mumbai while hearing an appeal filed by M/s. Cox & Kings Limited, Mumbai expressed doubts on the decision rendered by the Division Bench of the Principal Bench of the Tribunal at New Delhi in the case of M/s. Cox & Kings Limited 2014 (35) S.T.R. 817 (Tribunal-Delhi). The matter was placed before the Larger Bench. As per Interim Order No.104/2023 dated 19.10.2023 the Larger Bench answered the reference in para 49 as below:-

(i) The taxability of activity undertaken by the appellant will have to be decided on the facts peculiar to the case and in accordance with intent of Section 65, Section 66 and section 67 of the Finance Act;
(ii) The dispute in this appeal i.e. from 01.04.2005 to 31.03.2011 pertaining to the period prior to the negative list regime does not have to consider taxable territory as affecting the decision thereof.

16. The Ld. Counsel pointed out that in para 47 the larger bench observed that the earlier decision in M/s. Cox & Kings 2014 (35) S.T.R. 817 (Tri.- Del.) had not determined the issue on given sets of facts and that the Division Bench is to decide the case without placing reliance on the interpretation in the case of earlier decision in M/s. Cox & Kings (2014).

17. In para 48 the discussion with regard to the issue of taxable territory after 01.07.2012 has been discussed. The relevant paragraph at 47 and 48 of the Larger Bench decision in M/s. Cox & Kings dated 19.10.2023 is reproduced as under:-

11

47.The earlier decision in Cox & Kings had not determined its decision on the given set of facts but on restricted interpretation of the definition of „tour operator‟ as prevailing then. The stated interpretation of the definition is not consistent with the revision in the definition. Hence, the division bench assigned to dispose off this appeal will have to decide the outcome without placing reliance on the interpretation of the Principal Bench relied upon by the appellant. All the issues in the appeal as well as the order impugned therein will have to be decided on merits.

29. The Larger Bench in the case of M/s. Cox & Kings Limited, vide Interim Order No.104/2023, dated 19.10.2023 has observed that the decision has to be made without relying on the earlier decision in M/s. Cox & Kings. In para 48, the doubts put forward by the Mumbai Bench while referring the matter to the Larger Bench was noted. The said para 48 has already been reproduced. Prior to the negative regime, there was no requirement for determining taxable territory on levy of tax, as long as both service recipient and service provider is within India, such services are taxable. It was decided by the Larger Bench that the taxability has to be looked into on the facts of each case. In the present case, the entire tour has happened outside India. When the word 'tour' is defined in the Act, the said meaning has to be applied to interpret tour operators service also.